Cases2 cases

1 to 2 of 2

1. IL-0098 After 2i2c moved from ingress-nginx to nginx-ingress, a hub's Ingress took priority over cert-manager's temporary Ingress for the same host, so new hubs could not get TLS certificates

   2i2c2026

   Symptoms

   An attempt to launch a new hub failed because its ingress could not obtain a new TLS certificate. The day before, the same engineer had recreated the support deployment on the 2i2c-aws-us cluster and seen its TLS certificate orders stuck pending.

   Misrouted requestsDeploys failing

   Trigger

   Creating new hub deployments that needed new TLS certificates on clusters recently migrated from ingress-nginx to nginx-ingress.

   Root cause

   Breaking change in an upgrade

   Component

   Ingress controllercert-manager

   Contributing factor

   Change with a delayed effect

   Detection

   An attempt to launch a new hub failed; the engineer had seen certificate orders stuck pending on another cluster the day before and declared an incident.

   Remediation

   • annotated the Ingress objects that need TLS so that cert-manager could edit them in place to complete the ACME challenge

   Action items

   • Follow-up tracked in https://github.com/2i2c-org/infrastructure/issues/8016
   • Follow-up tracked in https://github.com/2i2c-org/infrastructure/issues/3278

   Lessons

   Swapping one ingress controller for another can change how Ingress objects that share a host are combined. cert-manager's temporary challenge Ingress depends on that behaviour, so the breakage shows up when a deployment needs a new certificate. 2i2c notes that it got lucky: it had already learned of this possible cause while testing on an internal cluster, and changing the cert-manager configuration was quick.

   View case
2. IL-0095 An engineer deleted the prod namespace of the LEAP JupyterHub while believing the kubeconfig pointed at a new cluster, and the hub was down for about an hour

   2i2c2025

   Symptoms

   At 5:00 PM BST on 12 August 2025 a 2i2c engineer declared an incident. While deploying a new cluster called temple and running into NFS issues, the engineer had deleted the prod namespace; the deletion hung, and listing the pods showed many users from a different cluster. The engineer's first message suggested that the kubeconfig had somehow been mutated or corrupted and that some other cluster was being torn down.

   Resources deletedService outage

   Trigger

   While working around a bug in the NFS deployment process for a new hub, an engineer ran a delete of the prod namespace with the kubeconfig context pointing at the LEAP cluster.

   Root cause

   Operator error

   Component

   Persistent volumes and stateful setsJobs and CronJobsIngress controllerTerraform

   Contributing factor

   No safeguard on destructive changeNo runbook

   Detection

   The engineer who ran the deletion noticed when it hung and the pod list showed users of another cluster, and declared the incident at 5:00 PM BST, before the uptime check on leap.2i2c.cloud failed at 5:32 PM.

   Remediation

   • deleted the single remaining user pod in prod so the namespace deletion completed
   • killed the nfs-share-creator job that was blocking the deployment
   • redeployed the prod hub with the updated NFS server IP address
   • deleted the prod ingress during the deployment so that users could not start servers mid-deployment

   Action items

   • Write an incident report
   • Write a short incident response document for the case "I deleted prod, what next?"
   • Upgrade jupyterhub-home-nfs and remove the nfs-share-creator job
   • Add opt-in hardening against nested kubeconfig contexts to the deployer system
   • Change the engineer's shell configuration to show distinct kubeconfig contexts more clearly

   Lessons

   Provisioning persistent storage outside Kubernetes with Terraform meant a deleted namespace cost an hour of downtime and no data. The engineer had no visible cue for which kubeconfig context was active, which turned a workaround on a new cluster into a deletion on a production one. The engineer knew the fix but did not feel confident redeploying without first confirming with the tech lead, in another time zone, that there was no risk of losing persistent data, and reaching the tech lead took time.

   View case

By root cause2